NETWORK TELEVISION: BAH HUMBUG!

In the Times this morning the Opinion section handles a few opinions about network television. Is it going to last much longer? I, like many, have for a while now thought that was a mute question, hadn't it died quite a while ago? I seldom watch anything on the networks. The question we used to ask was, 'it's Tuesday night, what's on? and that was a rhetorical question because we knew it was the night for this show and that show at 8, 9 or 10 o'clock. No more, just last night for some strange reason I ask that of my wife and we just looked at each other. Of course, we didn't know. It would get the same response tonight, or tomorrow, there isn't anything on network television. The question is no longer how much longer will it hang around, it died an undocumented death some time ago. RIP.

Here you will find the articles I read on this subject.

THE NUMBING DOWN OF OUR SENSIBILITIES
By Jim Kittelberger

Our television (what a waste) is turning into a daily no class, reality show. It is not merely a game of switching channels trying to find something that is not inane pap, but now it is trying to find something that doesn't make you want to hurl from it's effrontery.

Add to the list some stupifying commercial with very polite people sitting around the dinner table when one of the diners asks to be excused so she can 'pass gas'. In one of their little disgusting episodes the husband or boy friend says its okay, go ahead.

My God, watching television these days is not unlike running the gauntlet of bad manners and bad talk, it's just plain embarrassing. Somewhere freedom to express your every thought in front of any gathering has crossed over to mean that anyone has license to do or say whatever they want, wherever they are, without thinking of it's merit.

I'm reminded of the consul for the army back during the Joe McCarthy HUAC hearings, when the consul Joe Welch could not take any more of Joe McCarthy and said, "My God sir, is there no end to what you will do or say?" (paraphrased)

In order to make a buck, evidently there is no end to how crass, how disgusting, how damaging to whatever civility remains that they would not trash to sell a product. I remember reading once that it didn't matter much what you said in a commercial but you should repeat the product name as many times as you could, as loud as you could and people will remember and chances are purchase it. Sad but probably true. But everytime one of these commercials that lower and demean the publics sensibilities airs, it also lowers and demeans us.

Taking advantage of the wonderful youtubes I am able to bring back moments of my life. For example I was a young kid in 1949 when television was new and I was fascinated by it. Our next door neighbor was the first on the block, a cliche to be sure, but he actually was, to have a television set and he tolerated me most days when I asked to watch Captain Video and other brand new programs in the new medium.



It was great as I remember, but in actuality it really wasn't in technical terms. It was primitive in all aspects, but I wasn't a critic, I just liked it. I remember the reception was so poor and white lines would run up and down the screen and the horizontal and vertical holds would have trouble keeping the picture focused and I would watch it so intently that I would get headaches from the efforts. But it was worth the effort I thought.



The accompaning you tube video I probably saw live because I certainly would have wanted that ring with the one size fits all mechanism. I was a great send for things in the mail kid. I was constantly looking for something in the mailbox.


The other video is a PEP breakfast commercial with another send for a ring offer which would have been around the same time period. Ah the good old days.

I think television programming is 'the vast wasteland' in spades. I also think some sinister plot is afoot. There doesn't seem to be any writers worth their salt plying their trade in that depository of mediocrity. It's easier and certainly cheaper to just stick a camera on the street or in a persons house and wait for someone to walk by, compile many hours of this, and stick it on the networks as the latest realism show. There are still two things television does well. That is showing sports of all types, I like the baseball games, and running old movies.

But every so often a little show pops up that's fun to watch and is cleverly written. The one I'm leading up to is a Canadian comedy that's been running on Canadian television for four years and has just now made it's way to the U.S. It's titled CORNER GAS. It can be seen on the Chicago station WGN. It's a group of small town people living in the Canadian countryside running a gas station. Exciting huh? But it is the writing by a comedian who is brave enough to retain his own name Brian Butt that makes it fun, clever, and a joy to watch. Take a look, as you can tell I liked it.

This subject of television and it's dismal lack of programming, programming worth wasting the electricity on, irks me more and more. Does it really mean that the 'golden days of television' are behind us, left somewhere in the fifties or sixties? I don't want to believe it, but the evidence keeps piling up.


I deride television for it's lack of content, and quality. That's a no-brainer, as we say. Even we non-Harvard, un-elitist, ordinary joes can recognize junk when we see it. As the Supremes (court) described pornography to a country agog with their way with words, paraphrased, we know it when we smell it.

But every now and then, in the vast wasteland (Newton Minnow) something pops up that while you watch and sometimes after the fact, you feel like you have spent some of your discretionary time wisely. That happened to me this morning as I watched BOOK TV on the CSPAN network. The subject was Dan Walker, an Illinois ex-govenor, who has written an extremely candid book, it sounded like to me, of his quest for political office and his mis-deeds and subsequent days in the slammer.

I found Mr. Walker forthcoming and refreshing in his views, and even though politicians are not, usually, found on my short list of heroes, his presentation effected me. More importantly it used the valuable time allocated by CSPAN to hustle a plug (of course) for his book, but also to fill the time with insight and perhaps a little knowledge.

Time well spent. There is still some good stuff out there. You just have to look a little harder, or get lucky and fall into it occasionally.

WHERE HAVE ALL THE VIEWERS GONE?

So starts the piece. I thought it was just my wife and I who can't abide the offerings put forward by the television powers that be. I guess not. The people are staying away in droves. I say, GOOD. I'm glad that the numbers are reflecting the publics dissatisfaction with the drivel they're presenting. That they don't have a clue what's wrong is pretty off-putting. I can speak for the older generation, whom they have saddly no interest in, and tell 'them' that they might get a little stir if they would spend a little money on good writers to write good STORIES, not about teen-agers, but grown-up people with grown up interests, and grown up problems. When everything about television was new, the network owners hired well known writers to write new stories for television. It worked then, it might work again if they don't con the writers into writing teen age pap. Well I know they won't try this so I won't waste anymore time on it. You deserve your falling ratings. I'll turn now to the book I was reading, books remember them?

Read the complete article at: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070509/ap_en_tv/tv_missing_viewers_5

Two of a kind, one on radio and one on television, but entwined by its overtone of jazz. The radio show PETE KELLY'S BLUES starring Jack Webb featured Pete Cathcart playing his trumpet as background. The television show, PETER GUNN, featured original music by Henry Mancini, how great is that. Both shows were niche type shows, appealing to a select audience and maybe the music was the star and better than the show itself. Who knows. I liked both of them.

Mary Hartline and Dagmar: Two blondes from early television who did quite well for themselves.

I was fortunate to have been around when television first came on the scene. I remember having to watch it through the ‘snow’ the screen produced, but I would watch it as long as my next-door neighbor, who had the first television set in the neighborhood, would allow me to stay.

Two of the early shows were Super Circus and Broadway Open House, and the stars the shows produced were two blondes named Mary Hartline and Dagmar. Mary appeared as the circus bandleader and Dagmar did walk-ons and was the butt of jokes on the show. Both ladies did quite well. Mary ended up marrying a Woolworth and became a lady of society, and Dagmar became a beloved comedienne.




http://www.huntingtonquarterly.com/Issue35/dagmar.html more on dagmar

http://www.richsamuels.com/nbcmm/hartline/contents.html more on mary hartline

If ever I were a public figure, movie star, athlete, whatever, I would hope that I could have the faithfulness, the energy, and the loyalty of groups of fans. A group that, even though the show is long gone still watch reruns and comment on scenes and possible reasons for this or that. I have a particular show in mind. Homefront was its title, and it ran for only two seasons but it struck a cord obviously in many people and they won’t let it go into television history. I admit I liked the show a lot and videotaped it during one of those marathons on Nick at Night or TV land I don’t remember which. I have forty-two episodes, which I re-recorded onto DVD’s when I graduated to that medium.

The show appealed to people on several levels. It was of course nostalgic. It was history. And it was just well done. I was born in the thirties so I lived through those years as a kid and it brings back lots of memories. The attention to details of the day, the clothing, the cars, and the subjects covered are top notch, or I should say were. I am attaching a video clip from a site that is trying its best to convince the owners of the show to release it on DVD. I hope they prevail

http://www.homefrontondvd.com/id23.html

THAT TERRIBLE WORLD OF TELEVISION
By Jim Kittelberger




What has happened to the television networks? There isn’t anything to watch anymore. That is if you are over twenty-five, and that’s stretching it a bit. I understand, I think, that this is all a money game, and art does not enter the picture. If they could make a game out a gall bladder operation and have several nymphets trying to find it while removing their clothes, they would do it. It is all in the demographics, so I am to understand. The age group of 0-19 appears to have all the disposable money and will spend it, so they pitch all the shows to that group. I also understand that reality shows are a gimme to the network executives. They can group together three young ladies that will not hesitate to let garbage come out of their mouths, I suppose to startle the audience or show how worldly they are, get real, while losing their shirts, and three young studs also losing their shirts, panting and posturing in front of them. It used to be men chased the women, but that’s another story. The game perhaps may be to see how soon the women can bed all the guys, or vice versa, and she or he, will win a million bucks. Wow, what a lot of money for the networks to pay out. Nonsense, legitimate entertainment shows, re: Ray Romano’s show pays each of the stars, and I count five of them, a million or so a week, now that’s money. So the reality shows are a bonanza for the networks, but disaster for anyone with even enough taste or discernment to think ‘Everybody loves Raymond’ is art. It’s not, of course, but it can be watched by anyone, that counts for something; it’s funny; adults, that forgotten demographic can watch it; different age groups can view it, and if grandma comes in the room, you wouldn’t feel embarrassed and feel you should throw a blanket over the television set.

Wouldn’t you think the networks would feel a little embarrassed about what they offer the world each week? They once employed creative people and offered some first rate, original drama. Even at their worst they could not be accused of not having a variety of offerings.

I don’t pretend to know the root cause of the deterioration of the television networks, but perhaps it is the plethora of cable shows that caused them to cede any semblance of an effort to offer quality programming. It is apparent that they have all become bean counters, and if they can shove more drivel down the throats of the viewing public produced at rock bottom prices, they will do it.

So what can we do about it? I suppose we can write a letter, send an e-mail, but why do I think that if I folded the letter into a paper airplane and threw it out the window, it would have about the same effect.

Money is all they are interested in, so an economic boycott is an idea, but who among us is militant enough to go that route? Probably not too many of us.

So, we get what we deserve I guess. For me, I cannot do without television completely, so we have subscribed to the lowest cost cable available, but who gets hurt doing it this way? Not the networks, they don’t even know we’re not watching any particular show, so we rent movies of our choice and sit and gripe in frustration. They’re too big and too rich to take on. If there is an answer, I will enlist in the cause. (If it doesn’t take me out of my comfort zone.)